Support NeoGAF

[Jomjom]

All these comparison pictures show me is that Sony probably should have put the same hardware as the Xbone in the PS4 and launch at $299. $299 versus $499 would have meant that the Xbone would have been 100% DOA.

While I can see the difference, the vast majority of people who buy consoles would not and even if they could, would not care.

 

[Corto]

For those not seeing any difference on alr1ght screencaps. Open the images in two different browser tabs and quickly jump from one to the other and the differences will be more noticeable.

 

[Mr.Speedy]

All these comparison pictures show me is that Sony probably should have put the same hardware as the Xbone in the PS4 and launch at $299. $299 versus $499 would have meant that the Xbone would have been 100% DOA.

While I can see the difference, the vast majority of people who buy consoles would not and even if they could, would not care.

As well as the Wii U. My gosh, it would have been the PS2 all over again.

 

[rudieboy77]

Whats to keep both new consoles from running sub 1080p in favor of fps?

 

[SwiftDeath]

All these comparison pictures show me is that Sony probably should have put the same hardware as the Xbone in the PS4 and launch at $299. $299 versus $499 would have meant that the Xbone would have been 100% DOA.

While I can see the difference, the vast majority of people who buy consoles would not and even if they could, would not care.

Not sure if serious?

Console hardware is a long game

You want the power not for what you see you need now but for what you need in the future you can't see

 

[Jomjom]

As well as the Wii U. My gosh, it would have been the PS2 all over again.

As much as I want to get the Zelda LE Wii U right now, I have to say the Wii U doesn't need any help to fail.

Not sure if serious?

Console hardware is a long game

You want the power not for what you see you need now but for what you need in the future you can't see

100% serious. The power is nice, but comparatively the PS4 with Xbone innards would still have been tied for most powerful console on the market. With an even lower launch price, the Xbone would never even build a user base meaning Sony wouldn't even need to care about the long game. The game would be over quick, game, set, match.

 

[Feindflug]

Ryse should look better as well because of the hardware scaler and whatever AA is added on top of that. I don't see 900p being a real problem for most people.

Some gaffer in a Ryse thread about a week ago iirc did some comparison with some of the Cryengine's upscaling filters applied (sharpen or something like that) and the difference between 1080p and 900p was even smaller.

I agree that the rumored 720p as a common res in multiplats might be a problem though for MS...how big for the mass market? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Mr.Speedy]

As much as I want to get the Zelda LE Wii U right now, I have to say the Wii U doesn't need any help to fail.

Ha, unfortunately, I have the exact same feelings.

 

[ethomaz]

NPD was publicly available prior to 2012?

I don't remember the date but they showed every hardware number and the TOP 10 sales in the old days.

At least in 2011 all the platforms numbers were public.

 

[plagiarize]

It doesnt even take into account that you will sit FAR away from the TV to notice the difference. I'd say 720p is still enough!

720p looks like ass on a 1080p fixed pixel display compared to proper 1080p. Even sitting 4 to 8 feet away, the difference in something like Wind Waker HD or Rayman Legends (or when I play PC stuff) is obvious.

 

[andromeduck]

Remember when Microsoft said, "We are going to kill Sony at E3"? I just imagined a Kazified Syrio jumping out after the E3 conference and saying "We only say one thing to death. Not today."

oh man, that's so cringeworthy now

 

[alr1ght]

Whats to keep both new consoles from running sub 1080p in favor of fps?

Nothing? It seems like one will have to necessitate that, though.

 

[Gestault]

It will look worse in motion. This is photoshop scaling one frame at a time.

Why do you think a change in resolution appear worse in motion? The opposite, from my experience and common sense, seems like it would be the case. I have a feeling you're thinking of frame-interpolation in video, which doesn't apply to progressive images.

 

[nomis]

Why do you think a change in resolution appear worse in motion? The opposite, from my experience and common sense, seems like it would be the case. I have a feeling you're thinking of frame-interpolation in video, which doesn't apply to progressive images.

Image upscaling will always look worse when the process is time limited.

 

[SwiftDeath]

100% serious. The power is nice, but comparatively the PS4 with Xbone innards would still have been tied for most powerful console on the market. With an even lower launch price, the Xbone would never even build a user base meaning Sony wouldn't even need to care about the long game. The game would be over quick, game, set, match.

I guess?

That's certainly one strategy and may very well had been a decent one but then MS would see the competition and just drop kinect, match price if it was that significant

I think Sony made more value/buck with this iteration of the PS4 then the one you suggest from both the consumer and developer standpoint

 

[martino]

my room is 14 ft long, I've just walk to the end and I can still see the difference.

ps: even 1080p is shit on my 120" projector screen

&

 

[alr1ght]

Why do you think a change in resolution appear worse in motion? The opposite, from my experience and common sense, seems like it would be the case. I have a feeling you're thinking of frame-interpolation in video, which doesn't apply to progressive images.

The upscaling in motion will be more blurry compared to a static screenshot, plus whatever the upscaler is doing will not be as quality as a photoshop filter. 1600x900 isn't a small resolution, but anything non-native on a fixed pixel display will be blurry.

 

[IN&OUT]

As much as I want to get the Zelda LE Wii U right now, I have to say the Wii U doesn't need any help to fail.



100% serious. The power is nice, but comparatively the PS4 with Xbone innards would still have been tied for most powerful console on the market. With an even lower launch price, the Xbone would never even build a user base meaning Sony wouldn't even need to care about the long game. The game would be over quick, game, set, match.

PS4 with X1 innards?! Ewwwwww , I don't want to step have a generation back just to pay less...also X1 innards are not cheaper than PS4. They are just little outdated with added expensive esram to complicate things for devs and lift up slow DDR3 bandwidth.

 

[Gestault]

Image upscaling will always look worse when the process is time limited.

Considering how effortlessly it's been done on previous-gen hardware, let alone more modern hardware, I'd disagree with even that premise. Bicubic scaling (which is what was used in the images quoted earlier) is low resource by any measure.

The upscaling in motion will be more blurry compared to a static screenshot, plus whatever the upscaler is doing will not be as quality as a photoshop filter. 1600x900 isn't a small resolution, but anything non-native on a fixed pixel display will be blurry.

That's what I thought you were trying to say. The ease of discerning between different resolutions in a still image vs video is backwards from what you're saying.

 

[Donny]

HAHAHAHAHA

 

[SEGAvangelist]

PS4 with X1 innards?! Ewwwwww , I don't want to step have a generation back just to pay less...also X1 innards are not cheaper than PS4.

You mean a third back. PS4 is assumed to be 50% more powerful than Xbox One. That means it's 33% on the way back.

 

[op_ivy]

All these comparison pictures show me is that Sony probably should have put the same hardware as the Xbone in the PS4 and launch at $299. $299 versus $499 would have meant that the Xbone would have been 100% DOA.

While I can see the difference, the vast majority of people who buy consoles would not and even if they could, would not care.

while i too dont see a huge difference, whats stopping sony devs from targeting a lower resolution and pushing visuals still further?

 

[IN&OUT]

You mean a third back. PS4 is assumed to be 50% more powerful than Xbox One. That means it's 33% on the way back.

Whatever...I just don't want to step back one inch

 

[Jomjom]

PS4 with X1 innards?! Ewwwwww , I don't want to step have a generation back just to pay less...also X1 innards are not cheaper than PS4. They are just little outdated with added expensive esram to complicate things for devs and lift up slow DDR3 bandwidth.

Ah well if that's true, then my hypothetical wouldn't work. I was under the impression that the PS4 hardware components were more expensive.

 

[qa_engineer]

So is the consensus now native rendering resolution doesn't matter, and that 900p is no different that 1080p?

 

[lighthouse777]

goodness, what a fast moving thread
interesting indeed

but graphics mean little to me.. I played ZORK
and it had the best graphics.. it was your imagination..
it is on the top of my list for favorite games of all times

so whatever the Xbox One has, is perfectly fine for me
I prefer substance over style in my games



He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose.”
― Jim Elliot

 

[StuBurns]

while i too dont see a huge difference, whats stopping sony devs from targeting a lower resolution and pushing visuals still further?

There is no objectively 'still further', there are things you can implement that some will prefer, and others won't.

Personally, I'd rather we get perfectly triple buffered 30fps with zero slow down, then 1080p with very healthy amounts of AA, before we start worrying about ray traced helmet glass or whatever.

 

[Skeff]

So is the consensus now native rendering resolution doesn't matter, and that 900p is no different that 1080p?

Only from those who have an XB1 pre order.

 

[IN&OUT]

Ah well if that's true, then my hypothetical wouldn't work. I was under the impression that the PS4 hardware components were more expensive.

Also don't forget added hardware to handle Kinect.

 

[simplythebest]

is that so ?

name one

just as i thought you got no clue what youre talking about

http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_inconsistencies_in_Halo

Spoiler

Noble Six discovers the data pad containing the "latch key" at the Sorvad Relay Outpost. Kat decodes the data on Noble Team's way to Sword Base which, in turn, helps Dr. Halsey unlock the secrets to the Forerunner structure near the end of the game. However, no one tells us what these secrets were. It couldn't have been the location of Halo, because the crew of the Pillar of Autumn had no idea what Halo was when they first discovered it. If Cortana somehow contained the secrets unlocked from the Forerunner structure beneath Sword Base, then why didn't she tell anybody? It couldn't have been the time-space-warping crystal from the novel Halo: First Strike, because Dr. Halsey didn't know of its existence until she discovered it beneath Castle Base.
It doesn't make sense, because none of that comes to light in the Halo Trilogy nor the books. Maybe it'll be revealed in Halo 4 or Halo: Anniversary, though I very much doubt it.

Also, how did the Covenant supercarrier, Long Night of Solace, make foothold on Reach without anyone batting an eye? It's a huge mass. I'm pretty sure the Remote Sensor Outposts in the region would've picked up something that large on their sensors in slip-space. It couldn't have been cloaked, because the Spires were needed to cloak the ship. So how did that ship bypass Reach's defenses?
And why didn't the Orbital Mac Guns rain hell down on Long Night of Solace? The UNSC had twenty of them. Once it revealed itself after the destruction of the Spire, Reach's orbital defenses could've made quick work of its shields and hull.

If they destroyed Long Night of Solace on the spot when it was revealed after the destruction of the Spire, then Jorge wouldn't have died so early on in the game. In fact, he probably would've survived 'till the end. He would've hopped onto the Mass Driver and let Noble Six escape with Captain Keyes. Then Noble Six would've gone to Halo with John-117 and they would've kicked so much ass that the universe would collapse on itself; it couldn't take the awesomeness.

Also, where the hell was the UNSC fleet orbiting Reach? The UNSC had a total of 1,209 Naval assets on site at all times (I know I'm right, because I looked it up on this site). And throughout the entire game we saw only, like, what... about five frigates? Long Night of Solace couldn't have wiped out the ENTIRE Eridani Fleet out, because the rest of the Covenant fleet hadn't arrived yet and that would mean that the UNSC are completely worthless and humanity would've been extinct for about 20 years by now. And seeing how humanity won the war at the end of Halo 3, with the help of the Elites, that proves the UNSC wasn't completely useless. So where the hell was the UNSC Eridani Fleet at Reach?

Ugh. Maybe I've been looking too much into this. Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter. There's no need for any of you to reply. This is just something for you all to ponder. Exorcise that noggin.

If you read through all this, then that means you had nothing better to do with your time today, too! Virtual high-five time, buddy! Yeah!

 

[Bgamer90]

Neither company has great exclusives coming for launch but fuck if Sony hasn't supported the PS3 and its past consoles wayyyy better than Microsoft. If you don't agree with that you're even more blind than I thought.

It's true for the simple fact that Sony has had more consoles (causing their systems to be supported through 2 or even 3 gens) on top of the fact that MS previously lost a ton of money on the Xbox brand.

It's great that the PS3 is having a solid year. The system had a slow start and really didn't get the ball rolling until 2008/2009; I think that should be pointed out considering the fact that the 360 was getting constant big name core games before that time. 360 started big and ended slow this year but it's vice versa for the PS3.

But anyway, instead of making my point into a comparison, why can't you just accept what I said? MS obviously cares about core gamers -- if they didn't the launch lineup of the Xbox One would look much different. "Not caring as much as another company" =/= not caring at all.

Both next gen systems will have content for core gamers.

 

[Dreamgazer]

Eventually, people are going to start saying that 720P is okay cause they can't tell the difference.

(NM, they're already doing that with BF4)

 

[Skeff]

goodness, what a fast moving thread
interesting indeed

but graphics mean little to me.. I played ZORK
and it had the best graphics.. it was your imagination..
it is on the top of my list for favorite games of all times

so whatever the Xbox One has, is perfectly fine for me
I prefer substance over style in my games



He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose.”
― Jim Elliot

such bullshit.

Substance over style? how aout substance and style.

Rendering at 1080p does not make a game worse no matter how you play it.

The power differential actually creates more gameplay opportunities on the PS4. It's all about the gameplay is bullshit because you can have the exact same gameplay at better IQ.

EDIT: @simplythebest, spoiler tag bro.

 

[Bgamer90]

"So is the consensus now native rendering resolution doesn't matter, and that 900p is no different that 1080p?"

Only from those who have an XB1 pre order.

...Or just most people who play console games (unless you are talking about just this thread).

 

[la flama blanca]

It's true for the simple fact that Sony has had more consoles (causing their systems to be supported through 2 or even 3 gens) on top of the fact that MS previously lost a ton of money on the Xbox brand.

It's great that the PS3 is having a solid year. The system had a slow start and really didn't get the ball rolling until 2008/2009; I think that should be pointed out considering the fact that the 360 was getting constant big name core games before that time. 360 started big and ended slow this year but it's vice versa for the PS3.

But anyway, instead of making my point into a comparison, why can't you just accept what I said? MS obviously cares about core gamers -- if they didn't the launch lineup of the Xbox One would look much different. "Not caring as much as another company" =/= not caring at all.

Both next gen systems will have content for core gamers.

It's a shame that Sony's investment into first party studios is really paying off for them and clearly shows HOW MUCH they actually care about games and the core gamers as opposed to Microsoft's obligation to.

 

[Bgamer90]

It's all about the gameplay is bullshit because you can have the exact same gameplay at better IQ.

Heh, funny how 10 years later, the debate for the playstation console vs. the xbox console has flipped flopped.

2003: PS = gameplay Xbox = graphics

2013: Xbox = gameplay PS = graphics

Very interesting change.

 

[Macattk15]

goodness, what a fast moving thread
interesting indeed

but graphics mean little to me.. I played ZORK
and it had the best graphics.. it was your imagination..
it is on the top of my list for favorite games of all times

so whatever the Xbox One has, is perfectly fine for me
I prefer substance over style in my games



He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose.”
― Jim Elliot

If you prefer substance and didn't own a PS3 ... you missed some heavy substance games. Chances are if you only own an Xboxone the same will occur this gen.

Heh, funny how 10 years later, the debate for the playstation console vs. the xbox console has flipped flopped.

2003: PS = gameplay Xbox = graphics

2013: Xbox = gameplay PS = graphics

Very interesting change.

Who the hell is saying the PS4 won't have several good "gameplay" games? Some people are delusional.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Eventually, people are going to start saying that 720P is okay cause they can't tell the difference.

(NM, they're already doing that with BF4)

Well if you sit far enough away....

 

[Alo81]

This is photoshop's bicubic automatic. Everything gets smeary. In motion it will look worse. It's also not a fair comparison because when downsampled, image quality benefits slightly from the downsample.

native

upscaled

It should be pointed out though that different scalers will resize the image differently so the scaler used it just as important.

Here's a 1080p image.

Here's one scalers version of the image at 900p resized to 1080p.

Here's another scalers version of the image at 900p resized to 1080p.

 

[la flama blanca]

Heh, funny how 10 years later, the debate for the playstation console vs. the xbox console has flipped flopped.

2003: PS = gameplay Xbox = graphics

2013: Xbox = gameplay PS = graphics

Very interesting change.

Except this isn't even true and only someone like you who's I'd actually congratulate in terms of maintaining a consistent level of mental gymnastics could come up with. Comparisons this gen to any other gen are just simply ridiculous considering all of the fucking muddy shit Microsoft has surrounding this console release.

 

[Bgamer90]

It's a shame that Sony's investment into first party studios is really paying off for them and clearly shows HOW MUCH they actually care about games and the core gamers as opposed to Microsoft's obligation to.

Haha okay?

Why do you some of you guys always feel the need to turn a simple point into an (unnecessary) comparison?

Both MS and Sony are putting money into core games and that will more than likely be even more evident as the upcoming gen progresses.

 

[op_ivy]

as i posted in the other thread, not a huge difference IMO. i guess i'm not sensitive to resolution. not as sharp, not as much detail, blurrier, but it looks virtually the same. is 900p to 1080p enough to make up most of the difference between ps4/x1? if so, cool. if not, 720p?

 

[SwiftDeath]

Heh, funny how 10 years later, the debate for the playstation console vs. the xbox console has flipped flopped.

2003: PS = gameplay Xbox = graphics

2013: Xbox = gameplay PS = graphics

Very interesting change.

But that's not what skeff was saying

With the PS4 you can have your cake and eat it too

Gameplay + Graphics

 

[la flama blanca]

Haha okay?

Why do you some of you guys always feel the need to turn a simple point into an (unnecessary) comparison?

Both MS and Sony are putting money into core games and that will more than likely be even more evident as the upcoming gen progresses.

It should already be evident. The 360 pales in comparison to the PS3 in terms of these first party console game releases. How do you think it'll be any different next gen?

 

[MMaRsu]

Heh, funny how 10 years later, the debate for the playstation console vs. the xbox console has flipped flopped.

2003: PS = gameplay Xbox = graphics

2013: Xbox = gameplay PS = graphics

Very interesting change.

Heh seriously one of the most misinformed posts I've read in years on this forum, aside from my own ofcourse.

 

[Coxy]

Heh, funny how 10 years later, the debate for the playstation console vs. the xbox console has flipped flopped.

2003: PS = gameplay Xbox = graphics

2013: Xbox = gameplay PS = graphics

Very interesting change.

do you have a link to that guy saying it in 2003?
or is this some hive mind argument?

 

[Racer1977]

Ps4 is the one that gets screwed out of this though. Lowest common denominator.

First party will show full potential, 3rd party need to put best foot forward, or sales will suffer.

 

[Corto]

goodness, what a fast moving thread
interesting indeed

but graphics mean little to me.. I played ZORK
and it had the best graphics.. it was your imagination..
it is on the top of my list for favorite games of all times

so whatever the Xbox One has, is perfectly fine for me
I prefer substance over style in my games



He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose.”
― Jim Elliot

If you had a ZORK competitor at the time, cheaper and with subpixel font rendering on top of that you would buy it instead.

 

[lighthouse777]

such bullshit.

Substance over style? how aout substance and style.

Rendering at 1080p does not make a game worse no matter how you play it.

The power differential actually creates more gameplay opportunities on the PS4. It's all about the gameplay is bullshit because you can have the exact same gameplay at better IQ.

EDIT: @simplythebest, spoiler tag bro.

sir my apologies, that my opinion about my preferences caused you to get so upset it caused you to curse.
I do apologize, forgive my bad manners
but my I suggest you try ZORK?

 

[Bgamer90]

Who the hell is saying the PS4 won't have several good "gameplay" games? Some people are delusional.

A some are since the same group feels that there's nothing appealing in terms of the current games on the PS4.

Except this isn't even true and only someone like you who's I'd actually congratulate in terms of maintaining a consistent level of mental gymnastics could come up with. Comparisons this gen to any other gen are just simply ridiculous considering all of the fucking muddy shit Microsoft has surround this console release.

Haha, what is your problem?

FYI, I was on PS forums back in 2003. I was a big fan of the PS2 and I remember how the console debates went back then.

PS fans stated "gameplay matters more than graphics" where as the Xbox fans stated how better graphics mattered.

I just made a simple observation of how things have switched 10 years later. Your tone in your reply is really unnecessary.